If you shorten the season you will focus more people in the field for the time given. As is they hunt at their convenience. Given a two week season or less- everyone will be there because they have to or give it up. I've seen the mess in Washington- no thanks! So much of the success in areas I hunt is soley dependant on weather. Many times if you miss the weather event it's better luck next year !!
I saw someone wanted to isolate us to a region. Unless you do that by species many of us will have to choose what we want to hunt. I hunt 5 region three districts. I haven't seen a legal buck at any time of the year for at least 7-8 years and then it was a forky. At least in region 1 I might be able to find a deer. How about predator control. When I'm cutting fresh mt lion tracks 3 out of 5 days I think I know where the deer went.
You want to raise money for FWP. How about an audit of how the money is spent. The biologists I know have multiple districts and other than the winter range survey never get out onto many of them.
How about moving Parks to the DNRC. The opportunity to pay for stinky toilets out of my license fees didn't set well with me when they did it and it still sucks.
As a resident I favor raising NR fees to $2000 and the successful can only apply every 5 years.
Outfitters? How about only on private land and they have to be a resident?
A bit of a radical? Yes! Maybe I have had enough.
I think revisiting lion quotas is a good idea. I'm supportive of healthy, abundant large carnivores on the landscape, but there's a balance especially with cats that needs to be re-evaluated.
FWP got audited a few years ago. I'll see if I can dig that out, but a good place to start is HB2, which is the budget bill that establishes how the money should be spent. Compare that to outcomes and I think there will be a close correlation. Regardless, FWP is flush with cash for the next 4-5 years as they're still benefitting from the increase in sales for resident & NR both, and they were just handed another $10 million of incoming weed money for access & acquisition, and a few other programs.
Moving Parks to DNRC likely would cause diversion issues due to Dingle Johnson monies spent for fisheries in state parks, etc, and there's an issue with LWCF funding and some PR funding as well, especially as Parks is being grown to be Parks & Recreation and will include MORE sportsmen funded lands under their umbrella than currently. There was a big push to move Parks into it's own agency, which had constitutional issues due to there only being 1 spot left for a cabinet level agency to be created w/o amending the MT Constitution to grow more gov't.